Dodge Dart: DEAD?

  • Thread starter CodeRedR51
  • 624 comments
  • 68,213 views
Except "easily one of the worst cars on sale" doesn't really mean anything in 2014. Certainly not if they are canceling it without replacement so the "better" Dart stops having its already lagging sales cannibalized.
 
The Avenger is a hateful piece of 🤬 I seriously can't believe they sell any. It's bad enough that Chrysler created an awful platform, added a hideous body, ugly and cheap interior, and finished it off with an unrefined and inefficient powertrain.
 
It's on exactly the same platform, uses the same I-4 and the newer V6 isn't very good either. Just because the facelift is better than the original doesn't make it at all tolerable. See also: Chrysler Sebring/200.
 
Beeblebrox237
It's on exactly the same platform,
Click to expand...
It's the same platform with improvements to the suspension and body control, which was the second most popular punching bag for the original car besides the interior.

Beeblebrox237
uses the same I-4
Click to expand...
Which is why you should avoid the base model. It's not as if the competing drivetrain combos (especially Chevrolets) are particularly fantastic either.

Beeblebrox237
and the newer V6 isn't very good either.
Click to expand...
It's actually quite nice indeed. To the extent that the engine (and how easy it is to get in the Avenger) is very frequently touted as the car's best feature. Transmission programming is a bit wonky (it hesitates about as badly as the old Autostick did, but now there are more gears to confuse it) and they didn't really bother tuning the torque steer out, but it's much smoother than the old engine as it was installed in the Grand Caravan and a lot quieter than that same old engine when they had it in the 300M. It's no Northstar, of course, but it's much better than any, say, GM V6 I've ever driven.

Beeblebrox237
Just because the facelift is better than the original doesn't make it at all tolerable.
Click to expand...
And to what do you base this intolerable measurement on?

Beeblebrox237
See also: Chrysler Sebring/200.
Click to expand...
Another car transformed from completely awful to thoroughly adequate, particularly when price is taken into account. Thank you for the example.




I'm legitimately curious, now. Is this a topic of which you have little practical experience and are just parroting what auto blogs say? Because I have driven a 2013 Avenger. By no means extensively, since it was just a swap thing that me and a coworker have done a few times since he bought his car only a couple of days after I bought mine. But enough to know that this heretofore horrible interior... is much nicer laid out than the current Camry. And those awful materials it's made up of... aren't any worse than the highest trim levels of the midsize cars from about 5 years ago. It rides rather harshly, but the current Camry is no 70's Cadillac either. The seats sucked after about 20 minutes, but I didn't want to go fiddling with his settings to get comfortable in them.


I mean, the closest I've gotten to driving a Dart is sitting in one at an auto show a couple months ago, so it may be better than sex in comparison (though considering the completely middling response the thing has gotten ever since it started missing its development targets, I doubt it); but I can think of a lot worse things than spending only a bit more money for a mid-level Dart to get a mid-level Avenger instead with a much nicer engine and quite a bit more room inside.
 
Last edited:
Beeblebrox237
It's on exactly the same platform, uses the same I-4 and the newer V6 isn't very good either. Just because the facelift is better than the original doesn't make it at all tolerable. See also: Chrysler Sebring/200.
Click to expand...

The Pentastar motor isn't good? What? :lol:
 
@Toronado Every time I read about the Avenger I read how mediocre the new version is. I can'ts say I've driven it, so you're certainly more qualified to judge it than me, but I have sat in it (the facelifted version) and I still found the interior to be pretty awful. The Camry is pretty bad, too, maybe worse. But compare the Avenger to the Honda Accord, Mazda 6, VW Passat, Ford Mondeo, Skoda Superb, or even Ford Fusion, and it feels awful and dated in there.

If I were looking to buy a car in it's class in the US, I'd skip it altogether and so straight to the Honda Accord and Mazda 6. Both have much nicer interiors, far better driving dynamics, are far more efficient, look about $30k more expensive, and are a lot larger on the inside without a large increase in exterior dimensions.

@Doog The Pentastar V6 is powerful and smooth, but it's awfully thirsty. And really, a 3.6 litre, 280 bhp V6 in a very non sporty FWD car? Why?
 
Because ~280HP is what the top level Accord, Passat, Malibu, Camry, Sonata and Maxima all have nowadays; and the only manufacturer who has made the jump exclusively to 4s instead of optional V6s without screwing them up is Hyundai.
 
Doog
Do all non-sporting cars have to be slow?
Click to expand...
170 bhp is hardly insubstantial. It should be plenty quick with that amount of power. Unless, say, it were saddled with a poor gearbox, and if said engine were terrible and old.
Tornado
Because ~280HP is what the top level Accord, Passat, Malibu, Camry, Sonata and Maxima all have nowadays; and the only manufacturer who has made the jump exclusively to 4s instead of optional V6s without screwing them up is Hyundai.
Click to expand...
Yes, but for how many of those is the 270+ bhp option the volume seller? They all have good 4 cylinder options. Also, the Maxima is in a different class, you'll be wanting the Altima.
 
Beeblebrox237
Yes, but for how many of those is the 270+ bhp option the volume seller? They all have good 4 cylinder options.
Click to expand...
The Altima doesn't (especially not with the CVT it's now saddled with). The Passat purposely traded the really nice base engine it used to have for a 5 cylinder that brings back bad memories of the old 2.0 8v. The Malibu didn't get one until just last year; and the Regal still doesn't have one. The Sonata isn't too much better, as powerful as it is.


And since the V6 Avenger is so cheap, the take rate on it is much higher than it usually is on mid-size sedans; which was probably the point.
 
Beeblebrox237
170 bhp is hardly insubstantial. It should be plenty quick with that amount of power. Unless, say, it were saddled with a poor gearbox, and if said engine were terrible and old.
Click to expand...
This. 170 is plenty for most people and about average for a V6.


Ok maybe in the 90s.

:lol:
 
Tornado
The Altima doesn't (especially not with the CVT it's now saddled with). The Passat purposely traded the really nice base engine it used to have for a 5 cylinder that brings back bad memories of the old 2.0 8v. The Malibu didn't get one until just last year; and the Regal still doesn't have one. The Sonata isn't too much better, as powerful as it is.


And since the V6 Avenger is so cheap, the take rate on it is much higher than it usually is on mid-size sedans; which was probably the point.
Click to expand...
Buying the Avenger because it's cheap makes no sense, if you really need a cheap car then why go for the thirsty and more expensive V6? You're better off with a Mazda 6 that drives much better, is bigger, looks much nicer, and uses about 40% less fuel.
 
Beeblebrox237
The Avenger is a hateful piece of 🤬 I seriously can't believe they sell any. It's bad enough that Chrysler created an awful platform, added a hideous body, ugly and cheap interior, and finished it off with an unrefined and inefficient powertrain.
Click to expand...
Low-end buyers don't care about the quality or design of a car. Cars are appliances to them. They just want to cheap monthly rate on their lease. These people simply won't step up to a nicer, more expensive car (like a Fusion) because money is the absolute deciding factor. That's why ****** cars can thrive - there are a lot of people in America who are so bad with money that the only brand-new car they can afford is below the bottom rung but they insist on buying a new car anyway because it has a warranty*, even though nothing will go wrong with it until their 2-year lease is up, making that a null point anyway - and why the American market has been saddled with the worst the world has to offer for decades.

RE Fuel costs: Like I said, these people are stupid with money. That's why the have lame jobs and small houses and a crappy new car lease every 2 years. They don't care about fuel costs, they'll only have the car for two years! Right? Right? See the logic? Yeah, I don't either but whatever.

*By "has a warranty" I mean they don't want to look poor.
 
Keef
Low-end buyers don't care about the quality or design of a car. Cars are appliances to them. They just want to cheap monthly rate on their lease. These people simply won't step up to a nicer, more expensive car (like a Fusion) because money is the absolute deciding factor. That's why ****** cars can thrive - there are a lot of people in America who are so bad with money that the only brand-new car they can afford is below the bottom rung but they insist on buying a new car anyway because it has a warranty, even though nothing will go wrong with it until their 2-year lease is up, making that a null point anyway - and why the American market has been saddled with the worst the world has to offer for decades.
Click to expand...
I guess I know that the American market is full of particularly bad consumers, but it baffles me that people will buy an Avenger rather than, say, a Civic. If you want an appliance, that one is a lot cheaper to run.
 
Beeblebrox237
I guess I know that the American market is full of particularly bad consumers, but it baffles me that people will buy an Avenger rather than, say, a Civic. If you want an appliance, that one is a lot cheaper to run.
Click to expand...
The Avenger is bigger. This is America. They need enough room to take their welfare babies to daycare during the week and all their friends to the club on the weekend.
 
Keef
The Avenger is bigger. This is America. They need enough room to take their welfare babies to daycare during the week and all their friends to the club on the weekend.
Click to expand...
:lol: To be honest, I doubt the Civic is any smaller inside. The Avenger isn't well packaged and the Civic is.
 
Tornado
So you've never driven one made after the refresh, then; since now about the only thing that it shares directly with the original one is the exterior styling.
Click to expand...

Sorry, the Avenger is terrible. Driven two of them. Although, the Chrysler 200 sucks with bad breath. They're both ridiculous quantities of compromise, that I think the United Nations and Congress combined couldn't have even have conceived it, unless they were breathing through plastic bags during the entire design and R&D processes. Driven two of those as well, and the greatest pity is that the rental car counter does not have adequate shower facilities to wash off the residual stink.
 
Could this be the long awaited SRT version?

12187876_10153765038714224_555698949404118132_n.jpg
 
Seems logical, we're overdue for our SRT Dart debut based on the five year plan from a while back.

I'm interested to see which route they took, as I recall, there were several models being discussed. Seems to me that there was supposed to be a turbocharged, FWD model that might not have been a full-fat SRT (think Focus ST competitor), while there'd also be a 300+ BHP AWD model (think Focus RS). But all of this ignores what needs to happen first - A complete overhaul of Dart packaging from the ground up, in order to fix the huge gap the car has in terms of "value" compared to the Cruze and Focus, let alone the new Civic and upcoming Elantra.
 
So how on earth are they going to get people to drop probably 30 large on a probably 300hp Dart when the 300hp AWD 200 costs less than that?
 
Hopefully they'll put some real work into the chassis and cut back some weight to make it competitive. I'd like to see them go all out like Ford seems to have done with the new RS.
 

Latest Posts

Back